Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Fourth Amendment (2)
- Adverse spousal testimonial privilege (1)
- Article i section 7 (1)
- Child Abuse (1)
- Child Protective Services (1)
-
- Child Removal (1)
- Criminal law (1)
- Due process clause (1)
- Evidence (1)
- Exclusionary Remedy (1)
- Fifth Amendment (1)
- Foster Care (1)
- Geofence warrants (1)
- Governance (1)
- Law Enforcement (1)
- Neglect (1)
- Ninth Circuit (1)
- Parental Substance Abuse (1)
- Privacy law (1)
- Private Police Regulation (1)
- Private Policing (1)
- Property (1)
- Protests (1)
- RCW 13.34.065 (1)
- RCW 5.60.060 (1)
- Racial Disproportionality (1)
- Regulation (1)
- Reverse location search warrants (1)
- Right to exclude (1)
- Search and Seizure (1)
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
Wrong Or (Fundamental) Right?: Substantive Due Process And The Right To Exclude, Jack May
Wrong Or (Fundamental) Right?: Substantive Due Process And The Right To Exclude, Jack May
Washington Law Review
Substantive due process provides heightened protection from government interference with enumerated constitutional rights and unenumerated—but nevertheless “fundamental”—rights. To date, the United States Supreme Court has never recognized any property right as a fundamental right for substantive due process purposes. But in Yim v. City of Seattle, a case recently decided by the Ninth Circuit, landlords and tenant screening companies argued that the right to exclude from one’s property should be a fundamental right. Yim involved a challenge to Seattle’s Fair Chance Housing Ordinance, which, among other things, prohibits landlords and tenant screening companies from inquiring about or considering a …
Private Police Regulation And The Exclusionary Remedy: How Washington Can Eliminate The Public/Private Distinction, Jared Rothenberg
Private Police Regulation And The Exclusionary Remedy: How Washington Can Eliminate The Public/Private Distinction, Jared Rothenberg
Washington Law Review
Private security forces such as campus police, security guards, loss prevention officers, and the like are not state actors covered by the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures nor the Fifth Amendment’s Miranda protections. As members of the umbrella category of “private police,” these private law enforcement agents often obtain evidence, detain individuals, and elicit confessions in a manner that government actors cannot, which can then be lawfully turned over to the government. Though the same statutory law governing private citizens (assault, false imprisonment, trespass, etc.) also regulates private police conduct, private police conduct is not bound by …
Creating And Maintaining Consistent Standards Regarding The Role Of Parental Substance Abuse At Shelter Care Hearings In Washington State, Emma Vanderweyst
Creating And Maintaining Consistent Standards Regarding The Role Of Parental Substance Abuse At Shelter Care Hearings In Washington State, Emma Vanderweyst
Washington Law Review
When Child Protective Services (CPS) removes children from their home in Washington State, the State must hold a shelter care hearing within seventy-two hours to determine where the children should be placed while the investigation and dependency hearing proceed. RCW 13.34.065 requires the State to return a child to their parent’s care if there is a parent capable of caring for the child and there is no “serious threat of substantial harm” to the child. However, in July 2023, the Washington State Legislature will update RCW 13.34.065 to reflect a recently passed bill. This bill heightens the previous burden and …
Marital Disharmony: Examining The Adverse Spousal Testimonial Privilege And Its Impact In Washington State, Sabrina Suen
Marital Disharmony: Examining The Adverse Spousal Testimonial Privilege And Its Impact In Washington State, Sabrina Suen
Washington Law Review
In Washington State, RCW 5.60.060(1) provides that “[a] spouse or domestic partner shall not be examined for or against his or her spouse or domestic partner, without the consent of the spouse or domestic partner.” This evidence rule, known as the adverse spousal testimonial privilege, allows a defendant to exclude witness testimony by their spouse under most circumstances. A product of common law tradition, this privilege stems from a time when the law treated women as chattel with no independent legal rights. Since Washington State codified the adverse spousal privilege, the United States Supreme Court amended the federal spousal testimonial …
Gone Fishing: Casting A Wide Net Using Geofence Warrants, Ryan Tursi
Gone Fishing: Casting A Wide Net Using Geofence Warrants, Ryan Tursi
Washington Law Review
Technology companies across the country receive requests from law enforcement agencies for cell phone location information near the scenes of crimes. These requests rely on the traditional warrant process and are known as geofence warrants, or reverse location search warrants. By obtaining location information, law enforcement can identify potential suspects or persons of interest who were near the scene of a crime when they have no leads. But the use of this investigative technique is controversial, as it threatens to intrude upon the privacy of innocent bystanders who had the misfortune of being nearby when the crime took place. Innocent …